openldap-bugs July 2020

openldap-bugs@openldap.org

2 participants
120 discussions

[Bug 9227] New: Fix syncrepl exattrs to not delete local attrs
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 19 Aug '20

19 Aug '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9227 Bug ID: 9227 Summary: Fix syncrepl exattrs to not delete local attrs Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.4.50 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- An issue with syncrepl using exattrs is that the local replica may delete attrs that are being managed by locally deployed overlays such as memberOf (See bug#7400 for example). This behavior needs to be fixed so that the locally managed attributes are not deleted when included in an exattrs statement. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 8

[Issue 9299] New: Memory leaks in ldap_simple_bind_s
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 05 Aug '20

05 Aug '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9299 Issue ID: 9299 Summary: Memory leaks in ldap_simple_bind_s Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.4.49 Hardware: x86_64 OS: Windows Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: libraries Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: Ritu.Varkey(a)microfocus.com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 747 --> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=747&action=edit Sample code with call to bind API The call to ldap_simple_bind_s API leaks memory. Even after calling ldap_unbind_s or ldap_unbind_ext memory is not getting freed. Our application uses this API every time we make a connection to the directory. The API is being used on Windows operating system. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 9

[Issue 9291] New: Detection of corrupted database files
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 30 Jul '20

30 Jul '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9291 Issue ID: 9291 Summary: Detection of corrupted database files Product: LMDB Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: liblmdb Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: markus(a)objectbox.io Target Milestone: --- Let's assume we have to deal with a corrupted database for whatever reason (e.g. broken hardware or file system). Current behavior seems to be mostly undefined, which is understandable as it's not known what is broken (e.g. there are no checksums). For example, I'm seeing a SIGBUS in mdb_page_touch because the cursor's top page (mp) is pointing to invalid memory (0x7f99cf004000) during a commit: mdb_page_touch mdb.c:2772 mdb_page_search mdb.c:6595 mdb_freelist_save mdb.c:3575 mdb_txn_commit mdb.c:4060 Cursor data at that point: mc_snum = 1, mc_top = 0; myki[0] = 0 A SIGBUS is troublesome as it crashes the process, and I wonder if there are other ways to detect such inconsistencies. If that be possible there could be user-specific handling in place. E.g. a user might start a new database file. This issue was reported by our users, which also provided DB files: https://github.com/objectbox/objectbox-java/issues/859 I did not find a lot of consistency checks besides MDB_PAGE_NOTFOUND and MDB_CORRUPTED. Also, I think there's no current way to thoroughly check a DB file (e.g. like fsck for the DB file)? My first idea other than checksums was to walk through the branch pages from the root and check if the referenced pages are within reasonable bounds. Also check the page content (e.g. nodes, flags). Additionally (optionally?), it should be possible to check that the key values are actually sorted. So, it boils down to 3 points in summary: 1.) If there no way to check the DB file for consistency yet(?), which approach do you think would make sense? There might be two modes; one for a through check through all data, and a quick check that does not take long and could be e.g. done when opening the DB. Goal is to avoid process crashes and let users handle the situation. 2.) In general, is it possible to add more consistency checks in regular DB operations? 3.) Could the the particular situation (for which I provided the stack trace) detected (e.g. is myki[0] = 0 legal here?) I'd be happy to provide a patch if you provide some direction where you want to take that. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 25

[Issue 8784] SIGBUS in mdb_page_touch
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 27 Jul '20

27 Jul '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8784 --- Comment #3 from Howard Chu <hyc(a)openldap.org> --- (In reply to stefan.penner from comment #2) > I realize this issue is rather old, but I have some related questions; > hopefully that is alright: > > * The reporter mentions Android 7, do we know if the problem is limited to > Android 7, or do other Androids also suffer from this issue? > * Was someone able to come up with a consistent reproduction? If so, could > it be shared or described? I'm not aware of any consistent reproducer. Also, haven't run into this in quite a while, possibly it was already fixed in Android 9 or so -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 8784] SIGBUS in mdb_page_touch
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 27 Jul '20

27 Jul '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8784 --- Comment #2 from stefan.penner(a)gmail.com --- I realize this issue is rather old, but I have some related questions; hopefully that is alright: * The reporter mentions Android 7, do we know if the problem is limited to Android 7, or do other Androids also suffer from this issue? * Was someone able to come up with a consistent reproduction? If so, could it be shared or described? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 9266] Replace custom hostname and IP address verification with OpenSSL API
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 24 Jul '20

24 Jul '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9266 --- Comment #3 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> --- Also important to note that RFC6125 specifically states in section 1.4 that it does not apply to existing protocols, such as LDAP. It even calls this out in Appendix B, section B.3, that the LDAP protocol is *not* covered by this RFC. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 9301] New: Building OpenLDAP on Silicon (ARM) Mac
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 24 Jul '20

24 Jul '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9301 Issue ID: 9301 Summary: Building OpenLDAP on Silicon (ARM) Mac Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: Other OS: Mac OS Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: build Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: nicolas.brachfogel(a)4d.com Target Milestone: --- There's currently no target to build OpenLDAP on the new Apple Silicon (ARM) Macs. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 6

[Issue 6467] syncrepl enhancements
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 22 Jul '20

22 Jul '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6467 Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|IN_PROGRESS |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |TEST Keywords|OL_2_5_REQ | --- Comment #6 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> --- Commits: • 66a743f1 by Ondřej Kuzník at 2020-07-22T22:25:10+01:00 ITS#6467 Record minCSN in audit container • 43ebfa8f by Ondřej Kuzník at 2020-07-22T22:25:10+01:00 ITS#6467 Make accesslog a possible sessionlog source • ee79cb38 by Ondřej Kuzník at 2020-07-22T22:25:10+01:00 ITS#6467 Add test script -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 8645] syncrepl configuration error handling
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 22 Jul '20

22 Jul '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8645 Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Keywords|OL_2_5_REQ | Resolution|--- |TEST --- Comment #1 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> --- Commits: • 4b62f3b8 by Ondřej Kuzník at 2020-07-22T20:22:50+00:00 ITS#8645 Check for all syncrepl errors -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 9098] assert fails in meta_back_search in some cases after reconnect
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 22 Jul '20

22 Jul '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9098 Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Target Milestone|2.4.51 |2.4.52 --- Comment #19 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> --- Going to move this to a target of 2.4.52. We will be trying to reproduce this internally with some new hardware we've acquired. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

← Newer
1
...
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Older →

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

openldap-bugs July 2020